1 / 26

“ well, would you look at that”: Hitchcock's Most Elusive Film

“ well, would you look at that”: Hitchcock's Most Elusive Film. a woman’s Film?. WOULD YOU LOOK AT THAT: GIRLY STUFF. only Girly stuff?. Hitchcock: [de]constructing the gaze. Look at that: Pleasuring Mulvey’s Male. Hitchcock: [re]constructing the gaze.

jacie
Télécharger la présentation

“ well, would you look at that”: Hitchcock's Most Elusive Film

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “well, would you look at that”: Hitchcock's Most Elusive Film

  2. a woman’s Film?

  3. WOULD YOU LOOK AT THAT:GIRLY STUFF

  4. only Girly stuff?

  5. Hitchcock: [de]constructing the gaze

  6. Look at that: Pleasuring Mulvey’s Male

  7. Hitchcock: [re]constructing the gaze

  8. Well, Would Ya Just Look AT THAT: Who is Watching?

  9. I tell Ya… You gotta Look at it:

  10. FEMALE GAZE FRAMED BY THE MALE

  11. SHARED PHALLIC OBJECT

  12. To Catch the thief: Nouveau Riche Whiteness

  13. Whiteness = class mobility

  14. Class Mobility = anxiety

  15. Stealing our status

  16. Creeping into our neighborhoods

  17. The Camera’s Focus:Fetishing affluence

  18. Fetishing lifestyle

  19. Fetishing Wealth

  20. Maintaining differences

  21. The camera’s focus: Difference

  22. The film’s Grasp

  23. Working Bibliography Cohen, Tom. "Beyond "The Gaze": Zizek, Hitchcock, and the American Sublime." American Literary History 7.2 (1995): 350-78. JStor. Web. 10 Oct. 2012. Durgnat, Raymond. The Strange Case of Alfred Hitchcock, or the Plain Man's Hitchcock. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1974. Print. Dyer, Richard. "Don't Look Now: The Male Pin-up." Trans. Array The Sexual Subject: A Screen Reader in Sexuality. Screen. 1st. London: Routledge, 1992. 265-276. Print. Higham, Charles. "Hitchcock’s World." Film Quarterly. 16.2 (1962-1963): 3-16. Web. 11 Oct. 2012. <www.jstor.com>. Kael, Pauline. When the Lights Go Down. 1st. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1980. Print. Kaplan, E. Ann. "Troubling Genre/Reconstructing Gender." Trans. Array Gender Meets Genre in Postwar Cinema. Christine Gledhill. 1st. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2012. 71-83.  McDevitt, Jim, and Eric San Juan. A Year of Hitchcock: 52 Weeks with the Master of Suspense. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press, 2009. Print.

  24. McGilligan, Patrick. Alfred Hitchcock: A Life in Darkness and Light. 1st. New York: HarperCollins, Print. McGowan, Todd. "Looking for the Gaze: Lacanian Film Theory and Its Vicissitudes." Cinema Journal 42.3 (2003): 27-47.JStor. Web. 3 Oct. 2012. Mulvey, Laura. "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema." Trans. Array Critical Visions in Film Theory. Timothy Corrigan, Patricia White and Meta Mazaj. 1st. Boston: Bedford/St.Martin's, 2011. 713-725. Print. Neale, Steve. "Masculinity as Spectacle: Reflections on Men and Mainstream Media." Trans. Array Screening the Male: Exploring Masculinities in Hollywood Cinema. Steven Cohen and Ira Rae Hark. 1st. London: Routledge, 1993. Print. Neale, Steve. "Masculinity as Spectacle." Trans. Array The Sexual Subject: A Screen Reader in Sexuality. Screen. 1st. London: Routledge, 1992. 265-276. Print. Shandley, Robert. "Sun Scream: Alfred Hitchcock and the Anxiety of the Tourist." Tamkang Review. 35.3-4 (2005): 264-284. Print. Truffaut, Francois. Hitchcock. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 1983. Print.

  25. Wood, Robin. Hitchcock's Films Revisited. New York: Columbia University Press, 2002. Print. Zimmerman, Steve, and Karen Weiss. Food in the Movies. Jefferson, North Carlolina: MacFarland & Company, 2005. Print. Zizek, Slavoj, ed. Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Lacan (But were Afraid to Ask Hitchcock). London: Verso, 2002. Print

  26. Study Questions • 1. How might this film also be viewed as a man’s film? Does this problematize the notion of the “Whiteness Gaze”? • 2. Perhaps this film was just a way to give Hitchcock a paid vacation. Does it still have academic value? If so, why so little academic commentary? • 3. Cary Grant was left unattended for much of this film, picking his own costumes, muddling up lines, changing blocking at will … Why might he have been given this type of freedom from the auteur? • 4. Any other questions or suggestions for me?

More Related